Athletes are lying to us. They are laying and that we believe their is. Well, the majority of us do. The thing is, many Athletes that test positive for prohibited substances are blaming nutritional supplements because the cause for the positive test. Allows examine the following statement from Iowa State linebacker Matt Robertson who was recently kicked off the Iowa state football team for testing positive for a banned substance.
"I take full responsibility for taking an over-the-counter product that is banned by the NCAA, " Robertson said in a declaration released Monday. "I feel paying a heavy price for a very bad decision, as I can never again wear an Iowa Condition uniform. I hope my example will serve as a warning to others contemplating use of diet supplements. "
Statements like these Stanozolol Cycle
are triggering an unnecessary hysteria between the public regarding dietary supplements. Within Mr. Robertson's quote, specifically spot the term "dietary supplements". Health supplement is a very broad term, it covers literally thousands of different sorts of products. Right now there is merely one kind of dietary supplement that will cause a positive result for steroid tests. These products are called pro-hormones. Did a pro-hormone cause Mr. Robertson's positive result? Possibly, but we will never know the truth.
Pro-hormones are being used to raise the system's testosterone levels, just like steroids, but at a much lesser effect. Any athlete who needs a pro-hormone knows what it will. They know that pro-hormones are designed to elevate testosterone producing it more muscular mass and greater athletic performance. Upon top of that, pro-hormones say right on the jar something to the impact of "Professional and novice athletes subject to performance improving substance testing should talk to with their sanctioning body before using this product as use of such may cause a reactive drug test. " Pretty clear isn't it? A person can't tell me that Mr. Robertson can't read, he is "an educational all-Big 12 performer who was of the same quality in the classroom as he was on the field, inch according to his coach Dan McCarney.
Blaming a positive test on one of such products may be true because they can create a positive on a steroid test. However, it would also be super easy to blame a positive test on a dietary supplement when they athlete was actually by using a steroid. Since the actual supplements are hardly ever made public, it is not hard to blame a positive test on a dietary supplement.
Keep in mind that make a difference because a positive test is a positive test, right? Wrong. By these athletes blaming their positive test on dietary supplements rather than steroids they are in effect "passing the buck" That is, they are claiming ignorance, rather than taking responsibility, and they are hurting the multi-billion money dietary supplement industry in the process. This is not ok, not because it creates false beliefs among the list of general public about supplements, but also because it gives the federal government a reason to further restrict what you can purchase without a prescription.
Would you like to have to go to your doctor to get a prescription for a multi-vitamin? Imagine if you needed to buy a protein supplement? Would you want to have to attend your doctor for that? We didn't think so. These athletes and their organizations are being extremely irresponsible by using broad conditions like dietary supplements when describing positive drug checks.
The NCAA and other governing organizations should need to reveal what exact compound these athletes are testing positive for. By not doing this these organizations are allowing athletes to save face at the expense of an entire multi-billion dollar industry. By forcing the NCAA and other regulating bodies to name the particular substance that was tested positive for they would eliminate all confusion on what is and is also not the cause of positive tests. Either that or governing bodies including the NCAA and the press should be educated in the proper terminology of the dietary supplement industry. Painting reactive tests with the term "dietary supplements" is inaccurate, unfair and irresponsible.
Take for example Rafael Palmeiro, everyone remembers his overly compelling capital hill testimony. How sarcastic that simply a couple weeks later Rafael tested positive for Stanozolol, a steroid. Palmeiro tried hard to pass the blame. He blamed "tainted" dietary supplements, and when that didn't take flight he blamed a vitamin B12 shot. Well stanozol is a very specific and popular steroid. Right now there is no possible way that a positive for stanazolol can be from health supplements or B12. Right after people started realizing this, Palmeiro started claiming lack of knowledge, saying that he never knowingly took steroids. Well I actually guess Rafael will be making a good dwelling after baseball considering he is the only person on the planet that knows where to find pills that jump off the stand into your mouth on their own. Exactly what a cool idea, the little blue pill could be come the little blue bouncing pill. That would be neat to see.